The Shakespeare myth

fe*5

^ScD

CO

Burning- Lawrence , (Sir)

Edwin

The Shakespeare myth

PR

2946
D8
1912

Ube

>afceepeare

SIR EDWIN BURNING-LAWRENCE, BT.

MIL WILLIAM

SHAKESPEARE

COMEDIES,
HISTORIES, &
TRAGEDIES.

PtMflia! according to die TrueOrigmalJ Copia

Trintedby Ifaac laggard, and Ed. Blount, 1 61 $

GAY & HANCOCK, LTD.,
13, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, W.C.
1912.

The

v

Shakespeare Myth

HALLIWELL-PHILLIPPS says : " It was not till the Jubilee of
1769 that the tendency to the fabrication of Shakespeare
anecdotes and relics at Stratford Museum became manifest.
All kinds of deception have since been practised there."

The Folio of the Plays, 1623.

IT is now universally admitted that the Plays known as
Shakespeare's are the greatest " Birth of Time," the most
wonderful product of the human mind which the world
has ever seen, that they evince the ripest classical scholarship,
the most perfect knowledge of Law, and the most intimate
acquaintance with all the intricacies of the highest Court life.

The Plays as we know them, appeared in the Folio,
published in 1623, seven years after Shakespeare's death in
1616. This volume contains thirty-six plays. Of this number
only eight are substantially in the form in which they were
printed in Shakespeare's lifetime. Six are greatly improved.
Five are practically rewritten, and seventeen are not known to
have been printed before Shakespeare's death, although thirteen
plays of similar names are registered or in some way referred to.

The following particulars are mainly derived from Reed's
" Bacon our Shakespeare," published 1902. ^!ie spelling of
the first Folio of 1623 has, however, been strictly followed.

The Eight which are printed in the Folio substantially as
they originally appeared in the Quartos are : —

1. Much adoo about Nothing.

2. Loves Labour lost.*

3. Midsommer Nights Dreame.

4. The Merchant of Venice.

5. The First part of King Henry the fourth.

6. The Second part of K. Henry the fourth.

7. Romeo and Juliet.

8. The Tragedie of Troylus and Gressida.1

* Note. — The scene of the play is Navarre and one of the characters is
Biron. A passport given to Bacon's brother Anthony in 1586 from the court of
Navarre, is signed " Biron." (British Museum Add. MS. 4125).

f Note. — This has a new title and a Prologue in the Folio. This extremely
learned play which we are told was "never clapper-clawd with the palmes of the
vulger .... or sullied with the smoaky breath of the multitude," has recently
been shewn by Mrs. Hinton Stewart to be a satire upon the court of King James I.

The Six which have been greatly improved are: —

1. The Life & death of Richard the second. Cor

rections throughout.

2. The Third part of King Henry the sixt. New

title, 906 new lines, and many old lines retouched.
3- The Life & Death of Richard the Third. 193
new lines added, 2,000 lines retouched.

4. Titus Andronicus. One entire new scene added.

5. The Tragedy of Hamlet. Many important ad

ditions and omissions.

6. King Lear. 88 new lines, 119 lines retouched.

The Five which have been practically rewritten are :—

1. The Merry Wives of Windsor. 1,081 new lines,

the text rewritten.

2. The Taming of the Shrew. New title, 1,000 new

lines added, and extensive revision.

3. The Life and Death of King John. New title,

1,000 new lines including one entire new scene.
The dialogue rewritten.

4. The Life of King Henry the Fift. New title,

the choruses and two new scenes added. Text
nearly doubled in length.

5. The Second part of King Hen. the Sixt. New

title, 1,139 new lines, and 2,000 old lines retouched.

[The practice of false-dating books of the Elizabethan period was not
uncommon, instances of as much as thirty years having been discovered. It
has been proved by Mr. A. W. Pollard, of the British Museum ; by Mr. W. W.
Greg, Librarian of Trinity College, Cambridge ; and by Prof. W. J. Neidig, that
four of these, viz., "A Midsommer Nights Dreame," and "The Merchant of
Venice," both dated 1600, and " King Lear," and " Henry the Fift," both dated
1608, were in fact printed in 1619, three years after Shakespeare's death.]

The Thirteen which seem not to have been printed before
Shakespeare's death, although plays of somewhat similar
names are registered or in some way referred to, are : -

1. The Tempest.

2. The First part of King Henry the Sixt.

3. The two Gentlemen of Verona.

4. Measure for Measure.

5. The Comedy of Errours.

6. As you Like it.

7. All is well, that Ends well.

3. Twelfe-Night, or what you will.

9. The Winters Tale.

10. The Life and death of Julius Caesar.

11. The Tragedy of Macbeth.

12. Anthony and Cleopater.

13. Cymbeline King of Britaine.

The Four which seem neither to have been printed nor
referred to till after Shakespeare's death are*: —

1. The Life of King Henry the Eight.

2. The Tragedy of Goriolanus.

3. Timon of Athens.

4. Othello, the Moore of Venice.

Of the above plays, most of those which were printed in
Shakespeare's lifetime originally appeared anonymously;
indeed, no play bore Shakespeare's name until New Place,
Stratford-on-Avon, had been purchased for him and ;£i,ooo
given to him in 1597. The first play to bear the name of
W. Shakespere was Loves Labors Lost, which appeared in
the following year — 1598.

Stratford, to which Shakespeare was sent in 1597,
was at that period much farther from London for all
practical purposes than Canada is to-day, and Shake
speare did not go there for week ends, but he permanently
resided there, only very occasionally visiting London, when
he lodged at Silver Street with a hairdresser named Mountjoy.

It is exceedingly important and informing to remember
that Shakespeare's name never appeared upon any play until he
had been permanently sent away from London, and that his
wealth was simply the money — ^"1,000 — given to him in order
to induce him to incur the risk entailed by allowing his name to
appear upon the plays. Such risk was by no means inconsider
able, because Queen Elizabeth was determined to punish the
author of Richard the Second, a play which greatly incensed
her ; she is reported to have said, " Seest thou not that I am
Richard the Second ? " There is no evidence that Shakespeare
ever earned so much as ten shillings in any one week while he
lived in London.

At Stratford, Shakespeare sold corn, malt, etc., and
lent small sums of money, and indeed, was nothing more than
a petty tradesman, a fact of which we are quite clearly in
formed in " The Great Assises holden at Parnassus," printed
in 1645, where Bacon is put as " Chancellor of Parnassus," *.*.,
greatest of the world's poets, and Shakespeare appears as " the
writer of weekly accounts." This means that the only literature
for which Shakespeare was responsible consisted of his small

* Note. — The above very strongly confirms Mrs. Gallup's reading of the
Cypher, viz. : that there are twenty-two NEW plays in the Folio. The Tempest,
with Timon of Athens and Henry VIII., seems to be largely concerned with the
story of Bacon's fall from his high offices in 1621, and Emile Montegut, writing
in the "Revue des Deux Mondes" of August, 1865, says that the Tempest is
evidently the author's literary testament.

tradesman's accounts sent out weekly by his clerk; because, as
will be shewn presently, Shakespeare was totally unable to
write a single letter of his own name.

Let us now return to the Folio of Shakespeare's plays,
published in 1623. On the title page appears a large half-
length figure drawn by Martin Droeshout, which is known as
the Authentic (i.e., the authorised) portrait of Shakespeare.
Martin Droeshout, I should perhaps mention, is scarcely
likely to have ever seen Shakespeare, as he was only 15 years
of age when Shakespeare died. On the cover of this pamphlet
will be found a reduced facsimile of the title page of
the Folio of 1623. It is almost inconceivable that
people with eyes to see should have looked at this
so-called portrait for 287 years without perceiving that it con
sists of a ridiculous, putty-faced mask, fixed upon a stuffed
dummy clothed in a trick coat. *

The " Tailor and Cutter " newspaper, in its issue of
9th March, 1911, stated that the figure, put for Shakespeare,
in the 1623 Folio, was undoubtedly clothed in an impossible
coat composed of the back and the front of the same left
arm. And in the following April the " Gentleman's Tailor
Magazine," under the heading of a " Problem for the Trade,"
prints the two halves of the coat put tailor fashion, shoulder
to shoulder, as shewn here on page 2, and says : -

" It is passing strange that something like three centuries
should have been allowed to elapse before the tailor's handi
work should have been appealed to in this particular manner.

" The special point is that in what is known as the
authentic portrait of William Shakespeare, which appears in
the celebrated first Folio edition, published in 1623, a remark
able sartorial puzzle is apparent.

" The tunic, coat, or whatever the garment may have been
called at the time, is so strangely illustrated that the right-
hand side of the forepart is obviously the left-hand side of
the backpart; and so gives a harlequin appearance to the
figure, which it is not unnatural to assume was intentional,
and done with express object and purpose.

"Anyhow, it is pretty safe to say that if a Referendum
of the trade was taken on the question whether the two illus
trations shown above [exactly as our illustration on page 2]

* Note. — This stuffed dummy is surmounted by a mask with an ear attached
to it not in the least resembling any possible human ear, because, instead of
being hollowed, it is rounded out something like the back side nf a shoehorn, so
as to form a sort of cup to cover and conceal any real ear that might be behind it.

represent the foreparts of the same garment, the polling would
give an unanimous vote in the negative."

Facing the title page of the 1623 first Folio of the
plays, on which the stuffed and masked dummy appears, is the
following description (of which I give a photo-facsimile),
which, as it is signed B. L, is usually ascribed to Ben Jonson : —

To tlie Reader.

This Figure, that thou here feed pur,

It was for gentle Shakcfpeare cut;
Wherein the Grauer hada ftrife

with Nature, toout-doothelifc :
O,cou!d he but hauedrawne his wit

As well in brafle, ashchathhit
His face . the Print would thenfurpaflc

All, that was cuer writ in brafle.
JBur,fincehe cannot, Reader, lookc

Not on his Picture, but hisBooke.
B.I.

If my readers will count all the letters in the above, in
cluding the four v's, which are used instead of the two w's, they
will find that there are 287 letters, a masonic number often
repeated throughout the Folio. My book, " Bacon is Shake
speare," was published in 1910 (i.e., 287 years after 1623),
and tells for the first time the true meaning of these lines.

B. I. never calls the ridiculous dummy a portrait, but
describes it as " the Figure," " put for " (i.e., instead of), and
as " the Print," and as " his Picture," and he distinctly tells
us to look not at his (ridiculous) Picture, but (only) at his
Booke.

It has always been a puzzle to students who read these
verses why B. I. lavished such extravagant praise upon what
looks so stiff and wooden a figure, about which Gainsborough,
writing in 1768, says : " Damn the original picture of him . . .
for I think a stupider face I never beheld except D . . . k's
... it is impossible that such a mind and ray of heaven,
could shine with such a face and pair of eyes."

To those capable of properly reading the lines, B. I.
clearly tells the whole story. He says, " The Graver had a
strife with Nature to out-doo the life." In the New English
Dictionary, edited by Sir James Murray, we find more than
six hundred words beginning with " out." Every one of these,
with scarcely an exception, must, in order to be fully under
stood, be read reversed; outfit is fit out, outfall is fall out,
outburst is burst out, etc. Outlaw does not mean outside the
law, but lawed out by some legal process. " Out-doo " therefore
must here mean " do out," and was continually used for hun
dreds of years in that sense. Thus in the " Cursor Mundi,"

written in the Thirteenth Century, we read that Adam was
"out-done" [of Paradise]. In 1603 Dray ton published his
" Barons' Wars," and in Book V. s. li. we read,

For he his foe not able to withstand,
Was ta'en in battle and his eyes out-done.

B. I. therefore tells us that the Graver has done out the
life, that is, covered it up and masked it. The Graver has
done this so cleverly that for 287 years (i.e., from
1623 till 1910) learned pedants and others have looked
at the dummy without perceiving the trick that had been
played upon them.

B. I. then proceeds to say : — " O, could he but have drawne
his wit as well in brasse, as he hath hit his face." Hit, at that
period, was often used as the past participle of hide, with the
meaning hid or hidden, exactly as we find in Chaucer, in " The
Squieres Tale," where we read, ii. 512, etc.,

Right as a serpent hit him under floures
Til he may seen his tyme for to byte.

This, put into modern English prose, means, Just as a
serpent hid himself under the flowers until he might see his
time to bite.

I have already explained how B. I. tells the reader not to
look at the picture, but at the book; perhaps the matter may
be still more clear if I give a paraphrase of the verses.

TO THE READER.

The dummy that thou seest set here
Was put instead of Shake-a-speare ;
Wherein the graver had a strife
To extinguish all of Nature's life.
O, could he but have drawn his mind
As well as he's concealed behind
His face ; the Print would then surpasse
All, that was ever writ in brasse.
But since he cannot, do not looke
On his mask'd Picture, but his Booke.

" Do out " appears as the name of the little instrument
something like a pair of snuffers, called a " douter," which was
formerly used to extinguish candles. Therefore, I have cor
rectly substituted "extinguish" for "out-do." At the be
ginning I have substituted " dummy " for " figure " because we
are told that the figure is " put for " (that is, put instead of)
Shakespeare. " Wit " in these lines means absolutely the same
as " mind " which I have used in its place, because I feel sure
that it refers to the fact that upon the miniature of Bacon in
his eighteenth year, painted by Hilliard in 1578, we read : —
" Si tabula daretur digna animum mallem," the translation of
which is— "If one could but paint his mind! "

This important fact which can neither be disputed nor
explained away, viz., that the figure upon the title page of the
first Folio of the plays in 1623 put to represent Shakespeare
is a doubly left-armed and stuffed dummy, surmounted by a
ridiculous putty-faced mask, disposes once and for all of any
idea that the mighty plays were written by the drunken,
illiterate clown of Stratford-on-Avon, and shows us quite
clearly that the name " Shakespeare " was used as a left-hand,
a pseudonym, behind which the great author, Francis Bacon,
wrote securely concealed. In his last prayer, Bacon says, " I
have though in a despised weed procured the good of all men,"
while in the /6th " Shakespeare " sonnet he says : —

Why write I still all one, ever the same,
And keepe invention in a noted weed.
That every word doth almost sel my name
Shewing their birth, and where they did proceed.

Weed signifies disguise, and is used in that sense by
Bacon in his " Henry VII.," where he says, " This fellow
. . . clad himself like an Hermite and in that weede
wandered about the countrie."

It is doubtful if at that period it was possible to discover
a meaner disguise, a more " despised weed," than the pseudo
nym of William Shakespeare, of Stratford-on-Avon, Gentle
man. Bacon also specially refers to his own great " descent
to the Good of Mankind " in the wonderful prayer which is
evidently his dedication of the " Immortal Plays."

THIS IS THE FORM AND RULE OF OUR
ALPHABET:—

May God, the Creator, Preserver, and Renewer of the Universe,
protect and govern this work, both in its ascent to his Glory, and
in its descent to the Good of Mankind, for the sake of his Mercy
and good Will to Men, through his only Son (Immanuel). God
with its.

In the " Promus," which is the name of Bacon's note
book now in the MSS. department of the British Museum,
Bacon tells us that " Tragedies and Comedies are made of
one Alphabet." His beautiful prayer, described as the
Form and Rule of our Alphabet, was first published in 1679
in " Certaine Genuine Remains of Sir Francis Bacon, Baron of
Verulam and Viscount St. Albans," where it appears as a
fragment of a book written by the Lord Verulam and
entituled, " The Alphabet of Nature." In the preface we are
told that this work is commonly said to be lost. " The
Alphabet of Nature " is, of course, " The Immortal Plays,"
known to us as Shakespeare's, which hold " The Mirror up to
Nature," and are now no longer lost, but restored to their
great author, Francis Bacon.

10

Bacon shewn by Contemporary Title Pages to be
the Author of the Shakespeare Plays.

1HAVE shewn on pp. 6 to 9 that the title page of the 1623
Folio of the Plays known as Shakespeare's is adorned
with a supposed portrait of Shakespeare, which is, in fact,
a putty-faced mask supported on a stuffed dummy wearing
a coat with two left arms, to inform us that the Stratford clown
was a " left-hand," a " dummy," a " pseudonym," behind which
the great Author was securely concealed.

This fact disposes once and for all of the Shakespeare
myth, and I will now proceed to prove by a few contem
porary evidences that the real author was Francis Bacon.

I place before the reader on page n a photographically
enlarged copy of the engraved title page of Bacon's work, the
De Augmentis, which was published in Holland in 1645. De
Augmentis is the Latin name for the work which appeared
in English as the Advancement of Learning.

This same engraved title page was for more than one
hundred years used for the title page of Vol. I. of various
editions of Bacon's collected works in Latin, which were
printed abroad. The same subject, but entirely redrawn, was
also employed for other foreign editions of the De Augmentis,
but nothing in any way resembling it was printed in England
until quite recently, when photo-facsimile copies were made of
it for the purpose of discussing the authorship of the " Shake
speare " plays. In this title page we see in the foreground on
the right of the picture (the reader's left) Bacon seated with his
right hand in brightest light resting upon an open book
beneath which is a second book (shall we venture to say that
these are the De Augmentis and the Novum Organum ?), while
with his left-hand in deepest shadow, Bacon is putting for
ward a mean man, who appears to the careless observer to be
running away with a third book. Let us examine carefully
this man. We shall then perceive that he is clothed in a goat
skin. The word tragedy is derived from the Greek word
tragodos, which means an actor dressed in a goat skin. We
should also notice that the man wears a false breast to enable
him to represent a woman ; there were no women actors at the
time of Shakespeare's plays. The man, therefore, is intended to
represent the tragic muse. With his left hand, and with his
left hand only, he grips strongly a clasped (i.e., sealed, con
cealed) book, which by the crossed lines upon its side (then,
as now, the symbol of a mirror) is shewn to be
the " Mirror up to Nature," the " Book of the Immortal Plays,"

II

Ltigliae Cancellarii

IDS

GMEKTTIS

IATGD.

.Apud ^rancUEutn JMoiardum^
Adrianuxn Wijngaerde.

PHOTO-FACSIMILE OF THE TITLE PAGE OF BACON'S
DE ADGMENTIS, 1645.

12

known to us under the name of Shakespeare, which, together
with Bacon's De Augmentis and his Novum Organum, makes
up the " Great Instauration," by which Bacon has " procured the
good of all men."

Having very carefully considered this plate of
the title page of the De Augmentis, 1645, let us next
examine the plate on page 13, which is the title page that
forms the frontispiece of Bacon's Henry VII. in the Latin
edition, printed in Holland in 1642. This forms, with
the 1645 edition of the De Augmentis, one of the
series of Bacon's collected works which were continually
reprinted for upwards of a hundred years. In this title
page of Henry VII. we see the same " left-handed " story most
emphatically repeated. On the right of the engraving — the
reader's left — upon the higher level, Francis Bacon stands in
the garb of a philosopher with grand Rosicrucian rosettes upon
his shoes. By his side is a knight in full armour, who, like
himself, touches the figure with his right hand. On the " left "
side of the picture upon the lower level we see that the same
Francis Bacon, who is now wearing actor's boots, is stopping
the wheel with the shaft of a spear which, the " left-handed "
actor grasps (or shall we say " shakes "), while with his " left
hand " he points to the globe. This actor wears one spur only,
and that upon his " left " boot, and his sword is also girded
upon him " left-handedly." Above this " left-handed " actor's
head, upon the wheel which the figure is turning with her
" left" hand, we see the emblems of the plays; the mirror up
to nature (observe the crossed lines to which we called attention
in reference to the crossed lines upon the book in the title page
of the De Augmentis, 1645) — the rod for the back of fools—
" the bason that receives your guilty blood " (see Titus
Andronicus v. 2) which is here the symbol for tragedy, — and
the fool's rattle or bauble. That the man is not a knight, but is
intended to represent an actor, is manifest from his wearing
actor's boots, a collar of lace, and leggings trimmed
with lace, and having his sword girded on the wrong
side, while he wears but one gauntlet and that upon his " left "
hand. That he is a Shake-speare actor is also evident
because he is shaking the spear which is held by Bacon. He
is likewise a shake-spur actor, as is shewn by his wearing
one spur only, which is upon his " left " boot. In other
emblematic writings and pictures we similarly get " Shake-
spur/' meaning " Shake-speare."

The reader cannot fail to remark how perpetually it is
shewn that everything connected with the plays is performed
"left-handedly," that is, " underhandedly " and "secretly in

STORIA KEGNl

HKNRICI S&PTIMI j

I/VG.BATAVOR.
Apud Franc.Hackiitm

FHOTO-FACSIMIJ E OF THE TITLE PAGE OF BACON'S
HENRY VII., 1642.

shadow." On the right-hand side upon the higher level the
figure with her right hand holds above Bacon's head a salt
box. This is in order to teach us that Bacon was the " wisest
of mankind," because we are plainly told in the " Continuation
of Bacon's New Atlantis" (which was published in 1660, but
of which the author who is called " R. H., Esq.," has never
been identified) that in " our Heraldry " (which refers to the
symbolic drawings that appear mostly as the frontispieces
of certain books such as those before the reader) "If foi
wisdom she (the virgin) holds a salt." But the reader will
perceive that in her right hand she also holds something else
above Bacon's head. Only a considerable knowledge of
Emblems and Emblem books enables me to inform my
readers what this very curious object represents. It is abso
lutely certain that what she holds above Bacon's head is a
" bridle without a bit," which is here put for the purpose of
instructing us that the future age is not to curb and muzzle
and destroy Bacon's reputation. This emblem tells us
that, as the ages roll on, Bacon will be unmuzzled and crowned
with everlasting fame. How do we know so much as this ?
In February, 1531, the first edition of the most important of
all Emblem books, viz., " Alciati's Emblems," was published,
and in that book there is shewn a hideous figure of Nemesis
holding a bridle in which is a tremendous " bit " to destroy
" improba verba," false reputations. A little more than a
hundred years later, viz., in 1638, Baudoin, who had translated
Bacon's essays into French, also published a book of Emblems,
a task which, he tells us in the preface, he was induced to
undertake by " Alciat " (printed in small letters) and by
BACON (printed in capital letters). In this book of Emblems
Baudoin puts opposite to Bacon's name a fine engraving of
Nemesis, but which is, in fact, a figure of Fame hold
ing a " bridle without a bit," of exactly the same shape
as that shewn in the title page of " Henry VII.," which
is now under the reader's eyes. I may perhaps here state that
I possess books that must have belonged to a distinguished
Rosicrucian who was well acquainted with Bacon's secrets, and
that in my library there is a specially printed copy of
Baudoin's book in which this figure of Fame that is put as the
Nemesis for Bacon, is purposefully printed upside down ; T do
not mean bound upside down, but printed upside down, the
printing on the back being reversed and so reading correctly.
Other books which I possess have portions similarly purpose
fully printed upside down to afford revelations of Bacon's
authorship to those readers who are capable of understanding
symbols. This particular upside down drawing of the
Nemesis placed opposite to Bacon's name in Baudoin's book is

'5

so printed in order to emphasise the author's meaning that the
Nemesis for Bacon is to unmuzzle him and spread his fame
over all the world. This " specially printed " copy of
Baudoin's book is also " specially bound " — in contemporary
binding — with Rosicrucian Emblems on the back.

The figure which turns the wheel turns it with her " left "
hand, while with her right hand she holds over Bacon's head
what the reader now knows to be the emblems of Wisdom and
of Fame. Streaming from her head is a long lock of hair
which is correctly described as " the forelock of time," and
this is to teach us that as time goes on so will Bacon's reputa
tion continually extend farther and farther.

Bacon in his will declared that he bequeathed his " name
and memory ... to foreign nations and the next ages." ' Bacon
knew that much time must elapse before the world would begin
to recognise how much he had done for its advancement, and
there is considerable evidence that he fixed upon the year 1910,
which is 287 years after the year 1623, in which the Folio edition
of the immortal plays, known as Shakespeare's, first appeared.

With respect to Bacon's remarkable reference to foreign
nations, we must remember that the title pages here shown
and numerous other striking revelations of his authorship of
the plays were never printed or published in England, but
appear only in editions printed in foreign countries. I will
once more repeat that the title page of the " De
Augmentis " clearly tells us that Bacon has secretly with
his " left hand " placed his great work, the " Immortal plays,"
" the Mirror up to Nature," in the hands of a mean actor, and
that the title page of " Henry VII." repeats the same " left-
handed " story, and tells us that, while the history of
Henry VII. is written in prose in Bacon's own name, his other
histories of the " Kings of England " are set forth at the
Globe Theatre by the Shakespeare actor, concealed behind
whom Bacon stands secure. In other words,, that Bacon's other
histories of England will be found in the plays to which is
attached the name of his pseudonym, the doubly " left-
handed " and masked dummy, " William Shakespeare."

* Note. — The following story, related by Ben Jonson himself, shows how
necessary it was for Bacon to conceal his identity behind various' masks : —
" He [Ben Jonson] was dilated by Sir James Murray to the King, for writting
something against the Scots, in a play Eastward Hoe, and voluntarly impris-
sonned himself with Chapman and Marston who had written- it amongst them.
The report, was that they should then [have] had their ears cut and noses.
After their delivery, he banqueted all his friends ; there was Camden, Selden,
and others ; at the midst of the feast his old Mother dranke to him, and shew
him a paper which she had (if the sentence had taken execution) to have mixed
in the prisson among his drinke, which was full of lustie strong poison, and that
she was no churle, she told, she was minded first to have drunk of it herself."
This was in i6o«;, and it is a strange and grim illustration of the dangers that
beset men in the Highway of Letters.

16
The Shakespeare Signatures (so-called).

NO scrap of writing is in existence which can by any
possibility be supposed to have been written by
William Shakespeare, excepting only the six (so-
called) signatures. And, since every one of these supposed
signatures is undoubtedly written by a law clerk, the inference
that William Shakespeare, of Stratford-upon-Avon, Gentle
man, was totally unable to write, seems to be incontrovertible.

The first so-called signature in the order of date is the
one last discovered, viz. : that at the Record Office, London.
This is attached to " Answers to Interrogatories," dated May
I ith, 1612, in a petty lawsuit, in which it appeared that William
Shakespeare, of Stratford-upon-Avon, Gentleman, had occa
sionally lodged in Silver Street at the house of a hairdresser
named Mountjoy.

Among the " Answers to Interrogatories " those which
were signed very carefully by Daniell Nicholas, and the
" Answers to Interrogatories " from William Shakespeare, of
Stratford-upon-Avon, Gentleman, which are dated May nth,

1612, are both written in the handwriting of the same law
clerk, who attached to the latter the name " Wilm Shaxpr "
over a neat blot, which was probably the mark made by the
illiterate " Gentleman " of Stratford, who was totally unable
to write even a single letter of his own name.

To those acquainted with the law script of the period
it is abundantly evident that the " Wilm Shaxpr " is in the
same handwriting as the body of the Answers.

The next (so-called) signatures in order of date are upon
the purchase deed now in the London Guildhall Library, and
upon the mortgage deed of the same property, which is in the
British Museum. The purchase deed is dated March loth,

1613, and the mortgage deed is dated March nth, 1613, but
at that period, as at the present time, when part of the
purchase money is left on mortgage, the mortgage deed was
always dated one day after the purchase deed, and always
signed one moment before it, because the owner cannot part
with his property before he receives both the cash and the
mortgage deed. About twenty-five years ago, I succeeded in
persuading the City authorities to carry the purchase deed to
the British Museum, where by appointment we met the
officials there, who took the mortgage deed out of the
show-case and placed it side by side with the purchase deed
from Guildhall. After a long and careful examination of the
two deeds, some dozen or twenty officials standing around,

I?

everyone agreed that neither ol-:fy, names of William Shake
speare upon the deeds could be supposed to be signatures.
Recently one of the higher officials of the British Museum wrote
to me about the matter, and in reply I wrote to him and also
to the new Librarian of Guildhall that it would be impossible to
discover a scoundrel who would venture to swear that it was
even remotely possible that these two supposed signatures of
William Shakespeare could have been written at the same
time, in the same place, with the same pen, and the same ink,
by the same hand. They are widely different, one having been
written by the law clerk of the seller, the other by the law clerk
of the purchaser. One of the so-called signatures is evidently
written by an old man, the other is written by a young man.
The deeds are not stated to be signed but only to be sealed.

Next we come to the three supposed signatures upon the
will, dated March 25th, 1616. Twenty or twenty-five
years ago, on several occasions I examined with powerful
glasses Shakespeare's will at Somerset House, where for my
convenience it was placed in a strong light, and I arrived at
the only possible conclusion, viz., that the supposed signatures
were all written by the law clerk who wrote the body of the
will, and who wrote also the names of the witnesses, all of
which, excepting his own which is written in a neat modern
looking hand, are in the same handwriting as the will itself.

The fact that Shakespeare's name is written by the law
clerk has been conclusively proved by Magdalene Thumm-
Kintzel in the Leipzig Magazine, " Der Menschenkenner," of
January, 1909, in which photo reproductions of certain letters
in the body of the will and in the so-called signatures are
placed side by side, and the evidence is conclusive that they
are written by the same hand. Moreover, the will was originally
drawn to be sealed, because the solicitor must have known that
the illiterate householder of Stratford was unable to write his
name. Subsequently, however, the word " scale " appears to
have been struck out and the word " hand " written over it.
People unacquainted with the rules of law are generally not
aware that anyone can, by request, " sign " any person's name
to any legal document, and that if such person touch it and
acknowledge it, anyone can sign as witness to his signature.
Moreover the will is not stated to be signed, but only stated
to be " published."

In putting the name of William Shakespeare three times to
the will the law clerk seems to have taken considerable care to
show that they were not real signatures. They are all written
in law script, and the three " W's " of " William " are made
in the three totally different forms in which "W's" were

i8

written in the law script oi;chat period. Excepting the "W"
the whole of the first so-called signature is almost illegible,
but the other two are quite clear, and show that the clerk
has purposefully formed each and every letter in the two
names " Shakespeare " in a different manner one from the
other. It is, therefore, impossible for anyone to suppose
that the three names upon the will are " signatures."

I should perhaps add that all the six so-called signatures
were written by law clerks who were excellent penmen, and
that the notion that the so-called signatures are badly written
has only arisen from the fact that the general public, and even
many educated persons, are totally ignorant of the appearance
of the law script of the period. The first of the so-called
signatures, viz., that at the Record Office, London, is written
with extreme ease and rapidity.

Thus are for ever disproved each and every one of the
writings hitherto claimed as " signatures "of William Shake
speare, and as there is not in existence any other writing which
can be supposed to be from his pen, it seems an indisputable
fact that he was totally unable to write. There is also very
strong evidence that he was likewise unable to read.

Bacon signed the Shakespeare Plays.

A CAREFUL examination of the First Folio of " Mr.
William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, and
Tragedies," 1623, which are generally known as " The
Plays of Shakespeare," will prove that Bacon signed the plays
in very many ways.

I will place a few examples before my readers, and when
they have carefully studied these they may perhaps (if they
can get access to a photographic facsimile copy of the First
Folio of Shakespeare's Plays, 1623), be able to discover addi
tional traces of the great author's hand.

For reasons which it is not now necessary to discuss, Bacon
selected as one of the keys to the mystery of his authorship of
various works the number 53.

The Great Folio of the Plays of 1623 is divided into
Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies. Each of these, although
they are all bound in one volume, is separately paged. It
follows therefore, that there must be three pages numbered 53
in the Folio Volume of Shakespeare's Plays. I must also
inform my readers that every page is divided into two
columns, and it is absolutely certain that the author himself
so arranged these that he knew in what column and in what line
in such column every word would appear in the printed page.

19

Let us examine, in the first instance,
THE FIRST PAGE 53

in the plays. The second column of this page 53 commences
with the first scene of the fourth act of the " Merry Wives of
Windsor." In this act a Welsh schoolmaster, " Evans," " Dame
Quickly," and a boy named " William " appear. The object
of the introduction of the Welshman seems to have been that
he might mispronounce " c " as " g," and so call " hie " " hig,"
and " hoc " " hog." William also is made wrongly to say that
the accusative case is " hinc " instead of " hunc," and Evans,
the Welsh schoolmaster, who should have corrected this error
made by the boy, repeats the blunder with the change of " c "
into " g," so as to give without confusion the right signature
key-words which appear in the second column of the first
page 53, as follow : —

Eva. I pray you have your remembrance (childe) Ac-
cusativo, king, hang, hog*

Qu. Hang-hog, is latten for Bacon, I warrant you.

Observe that " Bacon " is spelled with a capital " B," and
also note that in this way we are told quite clearly that Hang-
hog means Bacon. In very numerous instances a hog with a
halter (a rope with a slip-knot) round its neck appears as
part of some engraving in some book to which Bacon's name
has not yet been publicly attached. I shall again refer to
" Hang-hog " as we proceed.

Next, let us carefully examine

THE SECOND PAGE 53

in the Folio of the Plays, which in the first column contains
the commencement of the first scene of the second act of the
first part of " King Henry the Fourth." Two carriers are con
versing, and we read : —

1 Car. What Ostler, come away, and be hangd; come
away.

2 Car. I have a Gammon of Bacon, and two razes of
Ginger, to be delivered as farre as Charing-crosse.

Observe that gammon is spelled with a capital " G," and
Bacon also is spelled with a capital " B." Thus we have found
Bacon in the second page 53. But I must not forget to
inform my readers that this second page 53 is really and
evidently of set purpose falsely numbered 53, because page 46

* Note. — In the folio Ac-cusativo king, hang, hog are in italics as here printed.

20

is immediately followed by 49, there being no page numbered
47 or 48 in the Histories, the second part of the Plays.

Having found what appears to be a revelation in each
of the first two pages numbered 53 in the First Folio, we
must remember that a Baconian revelation, in order to be
complete, satisfactory, and certain, requires to be repeated
" three " times. The uninitiated inquirer will not be able to
perceive upon the third page 53, on which is found the
beginning of " The Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet," any trace
of Bacon, or hog or pig, or anything suggesting such things.
The initiated will know that the Great " Master-Mason " will
supply two visible pillars, but that the third pillar will be the
invisible pillar, the Shibboleth; therefore, the informed will not
expect to find the third key upon the visible page 53, but upon

THE INVISIBLE PAGE 53.

Most of my readers will not fail to perceive that
the invisible page 53 must be the page that is 53,
when we count not from the beginning, but from the end
of the book of Tragedies, that is, from the end of the volume.

The last page in the Folio is 399. This is falsely num
bered 993, not by accident or by a misprint, but (as the great
cryptographic book, by Gustavus Selenus [The man in the
Moon], published in 1624, will tell those who are able to read
it) because 993 forms the word " Baconus," a signature of
Bacon. Let me repeat that the last page of the Great Folio of
the plays is page 399, and deducting 53 from 399 we obtain
the number 346, which is

THE PAGE 53 FROM THE END.

On this page, 346, in the first column, we find part of
" The Tragedie of Anthony and Cleopatra," and we there read,

Enobar. Or if you borrow one another's Love for the
instant, you may when you heare no more words of
Pompey returne it againe : you shall have time to wrangle
in, when you have nothing else to do.

f Anth. Thou art a Souldier, onely speake no more.

Enob. That trueth should be silent, I had almost for
got.

Now here we perceive that " Pompey!' " in," and " got," by
the manner in which the type is arranged in the column, come
directly under each other, and their initial letters being P. I. G.,
we quite easily read " pig," which is what we were looking for.

But on this " invisible" page 53, in which the key-word is
found, other very important revelations may also be discovered,

21

because it is the " Shibboleth " page. If we count the head
line title and all the lines that come to the left-hand edge of
the column on this page 346, we find that " Pompey? which
begins the word, " pig " is upon

THE 43RD LINE. (Example 1.)

Bacon very frequently signed with some form of cypher
the first page of his secret books. Let us, then, look at the
first page of the Great Folio of 1623, on which is -the
commencement of the play of " The Tempest." In the first
column of that first page we shall read

is perfect Gallowes : stand fast good Fate to his han
ging, make the rope of his destiny our cable, for our
owne doth little advantage : If he be not borne to bee
hang'd, our case is miserable.

Here, reading upwards from hang'd, we read hang'd,
H. O. G., the " h " of hang'd being twice used. And just as
" Pompey" the commencement of Pig, is upon the 43rd line of
page 346 (the invisible page 53), so here on page I the com
mencing word "hang'd" is also upon

THE 43RD LINE (Example 2.)

counting all the lines without exception, including as be
fore the head-line titles. Observe, that it is only made
possible for us to read " hang'd hog," because by the printer's
" error " hanging is divided improperly as han-ging instead
of hang-ing. This apparent misprint is a most careful
arrangement made by the great author himself.

I must once again repeat that there are no misprints or
errors in the First Folio, 1623, because the great author was
alive, and most carefully arranged every column in every page,
and every word in every column, so that we should find
every word exactly where we do find such particular
word. Hang'd hog is, therefore, clearly the signature of
the great author upon the first page of the Folio, just
as 993 is his signature upon the last page of the Folio. But,
as I have already said, in order to obtain a full, certain and
complete revelation we must discover a third example. This
we shall find in the second column of

THE FIRST PAGE 43. (Example 3.)

wherein is the first scene of the second act of " The Merry
Wives of Windsor," where we read as follows : —

Mis. Page. What's the matter, woman ?

Mi. Ford. O woman : if it were not for one trifling re
spect, I could come to such honour.

Mi. Page. Hang the trifle (woman) take the honour.

22

Here, reading the initial letters of each line upwards from
" Hang," we get quite clearly S. O. W., and we perceive that
" Hang sow " is just as much Bacon as is Hang hog. Thus,
we get a triplet of No. 43, as we had a triplet of page 53,
but we should also realise that we get a third triplet, because
we find

HANG HOG (Example 1.)

on page one in the Comedies, the first portion of the plays,
and we find

HANG sow (Example 2.)

which is practically the same thing as Hang hog, upon page 43
in the Comedies, the first portion of the plays, and we find that

HANG-HOG is LATTEN FOR BACON (Example 3.)

is on page 53 in the Comedies, the first portion of the plays,
and " Hang-hog is Bacon," gives the Shibboleth, and affords
the explanation of the two previous examples. Thus we have
a revelation of Bacon's authorship in " three times three "
forms, and the revelation is, therefore, " absolutely perfect."

THE NUMBER 36.

There are thirty-six plays in the First Folio. This is not
accidental. Thirty-six is a cabalistic number, and is used in
several of Bacon's works when he refers to the Stage or to
Plays.

THE 36TH ESSAY,

in the Italian edition of Bacon's " Essays," published in Lon
don, in 1618, is entitled " Fattioni " (Stage Plays).

THE 36 TH ANTITHETA.

In the Latin edition of Bacon's " Advancement of Learn
ing," published in 1623, the same year in which the Folio of
the Plays appeared, the XXXVI. Antitheta commences
" Amorum multa debet scena (stage plays)," and when the
English edition was brought out in 1640, the XXXVI.
Antitheta commences with the word " The Stage."

THE 36TH APOPHTHEGM.

In the collection of Bacon's " Apophthegms," printed in
1671, Apophthegm 36 reads as follows, and fully explains
the meaning of " Hang-hog is latten for Bacon, I warrant you."

" Sir 'Nicholas Bacon, being appointed a Judge for the
Northern Circuit, and having brought his Trials that came
before him to such a pass, as the passing of Sentence on
Malefactors, he was by one of the Malefactors mightily

23

importuned for to save his life, which when nothing that he
had said did avail, he at length desired his mercy on the
account of kindred : Prethee said my Lord Judge, how came
that in ? Why, if it please you my Lord, your name is Bacon,
and mine is Hog, and in all Ages Hog and Bacon have been
so near kindred, that they are not to be separated. I [Aye],
but, replyed Judge Bacon, you and I cannot be kindred except
you be hanged; for Hog is not Bacon until it be well hanged?

PAGE 53.

At an early date Bacon selected the number " 53 " to give
in numerous books revelations concerning his authorship. In
Florio's "Second Frutes," published in 1591, on page 53 we
read : —

H. A slice of bacon, would make us taste this wine well.
S. What ho, set that gammon of bakon upon the board.

Florio was always a servant of Bacon's, and received a
pension for " making my lord's works known abroad." The
above is inserted on page 53 to inform us that Bacon's name
may be spelled in many different ways, as students of various
books will find to be the fact.

In the " Mikrokosmos," * of which editions both in Latin
and in French were published at Antwerp in 1592, we find on
Page 53 a- picture of Circe's Island, which the intelligent
reader will perceive represents " the Stage." Beneath it are
the words from Proverbs ix. 17, which in our English
authorised version read, " Stolen waters are sweet, and
bread eaten in secret is pleasant." Examining this
engraving, we perceive in the forefront Bacon's boar,
drawn exactly as it is heraldically portrayed in Bacon's
crest, but with a man's head surmounted by a " Cap of
Liberty," and we should remember the words in Shakespeare's
play, " As You Like It " (which means' " Wisdom from the
mouth of a clown ") : " I must have liberty : ... to blow
on whom I please, for so fools have . . . Invest me in my
motley : Give me leave to speak my mind, and I will through
and through cleanse the foule bodie of th' infected world, if
they will patiently receive my medicine."

In Bacon's " Advancement of Learning," 1640, first edition
in English, we find a first page " 53." In the margin of this
page we find " Alexand " : (Bacon sometimes alluded to him
self as Alexander). But the page 55 is misnumbered " 53," and

x * Note. — The title page is headed with the figure of a Chameleon, which forms
the " 53rd " of " Alciati's Emblems." The Chameleon was supposed to assume
various appearances, and is therefore used as an emblem for Bacon, who assumed
numerous masks in order to do good to all mankind, though in a " despised weed."

on this second and false page " 53 " we read in the margin

S. FRAN

BACOM,

all in capital letters, almost the only marginal capital letters
in the whole of the book, which is Bacon's own book, and
yet has this striking reference to himself on the false page
" 53." The number of pages " 53 " /Very frequently falsely
paged " 53 "), in which some reference to Bacon or to the Plays
may be discovered, is very large. I will, however, now quote
only two other instances.

In 1664, the third edition of Shakespeare's plays, contain
ing seven extra plays, was issued, and the editors, in order to
mislead the initiated and pretend that they had Bacon's autho
rity for so adding some of his inferior plays to his
revised selection of the thirty-six plays which formed the
great Folio of 1623, numbered two pages 53, which they
placed opposite to each other, and on each of these we find
" S. Albans " (Bacon was Viscount S. Albans).

In 1709, the fifth edition was published by Nicholas Rowe,
and in that edition there is a proper page 53, and also 55 is mis
printed 53 (the only mispagination in the whole book of 3,324
pages), and this is made in the false page 53 in order to afford
a revelation if we carefully read both pages " 53 " together.

The Northumberland Manuscripts.

ON page 25 is shewn a type transcript of the cover or out
side page of a collection of manuscripts in the posses
sion of the Duke of Northumberland, which were dis
covered at Northumberland House in London in 1867 Three
years later, viz., in 1870, James Spedding published a thin little
volume entituled " A Conference of Pleasure," in which he
printed a full size facsimile of the original of the outside page,
which is here reproduced in modern script on page 25. He also
gave a few particulars of the MSS. themselves.

In 1904, Mr. Frank J. Burgoyne brought out a Collotype
Facsimile of every page that now remains of the collection
of MSS. in an edition limited to 250 copies, in a fine Royal
Quarto at the price of £4 45. each. Of the MSS. mentioned
on the cover, nine only now remain, and of these, six are cer
tainly by Francis Bacon; the first being written by him for
a Masque or " fanciful devise," which Mr. Spedding thinks
was presented at the Court of Elizabeth in 1592.

The reader's attention is directed to this Masque, which
consists of " The praise of the Worthiest Vertue, &c." Lower

REPRODUCTION IN MODERN SCRIPT OF FOLIO 1 OF THE NORTHUMBERLAND MSS.

26

down we read : " Speaches for my Lord of Essex at the tylt,"
" Speach for my Lord of Sussex tilt," " Orations at Graies Inne
revells." We must remember that in numerous instances when
masques were presented, reference is made to Bacon having in
some way countenanced them or assisted them by taking part
in the arrangement of the " dumb shew." This teaches us how
familiar Bacon was with stage presentations.

Further down on the page we find " Rychard the second "
and " Rychard the third." Mr. Spedding declared himself
satisfied that these were the (so-called) Shakespeare plays.
Immediately above, we read " William Shakespeare," which
appears to be part of the original writing upon the page.

It is not necessary here to refer to the remainder of these
original writings, but there is a mass of curious scribblings
all over the page. Concerning these, Mr. Spedding says :
" I find nothing in these later scribblings or in what remains
of the book itself to indicate a date later than the reign of
Elizabeth." They are therefore written by a contemporary
hand.

For the purpose of reference I have placed the letters
a b c d e outside of the facsimile.

(a) " Honorificabilitudine." This curious long word, when
taken in conjunction with the words " Your William Shakes
peare," which are found more than once upon the page, appears
to have some reference to the longer word " Honorificabili-
tudinitatibus," which is found in " Loves Labors Lost," printed
in 1598, the first play to which the name of Shakespeare
(spelled Shakespere) was attached. I must repeat that upon
no play appeared the name William Shakespeare until that
man had been sent permanently away to Stratford in 1597.
The long word, as I shew in my book, " Bacon is Shakespeare,"
Chapter X., page 84, gives us the Masonic number 287, and
really tells us with the most absolute mechanical certainty
that the plays were Francis Bacon's " orphan " children.

(b) " By Mr. ffrauncis William Shakespeare

Baco "

observe that ffrauncis is repeated " upside down," over these
lines, and that yoSseif" also printed upside down, appears
at the commencement of the lines. The reader will therefore
not be surprised to read at (c) " revealing day through every
crany peepes " ; which seems to be a particularly accurate
account of the object of the revelations afforded by the
" Scribblings " so called, viz., to inform us that " Bacon
was Shakespeare." The same kind of revelation is again re
peated at (d), when we find ..WiiiiamUsrhakespeare and then above ifc

27

" Shak Shakespeare " and " your William Shakespeare." And
the reader should remember that, as Mr. Spedding admits,
all these so-called " scribblings " were contemporary and
written before 1603, the date of the death of Queen Elizabeth.

I also call attention at (e) to the three curious scrolls,
each written with one continuous sweep of the pen, which it
would take a great deal of practice to succeed in successfully
and easily writing. I myself am in a particularly fortunate
position with regard to these scrolls, because I possess a very
fine large-paper copy of " Les Tenures de Monsieur Littleton,"
1591. This work is annotated throughout in what the
British Museum authorities admit to be the handwriting of
Francis Bacon, and, upon the wide large paper margin of
the title page, eight similar scrolls appear, which have evi
dently some (shall we say Rosicrucian) significance.*

Perhaps I should add that here, in this little book, before
the reader's eyes, is the knowledge of this revealing page of
the Northumberland MSS. given for the first time wide
publicity. Spedding's little book, which has been long out of
print, was too insignificant to attract much notice, and Mr.
Burgoyne's splendid work was too expensive for ordinary
purchasers.

Bacon and the English Language.

WE owe our mighty English tongue of to-day to Francis
. Bacon and to Francis Bacon alone. The time has now
come when this stupendous fact should be taught in
every school, and that the whole of the Anglo-Saxon speaking
peoples should know that the most glorious birthright which
they possess, their matchless language, was the result of the life
and labour of one man, viz. — Francis Bacon, who, when as
little more than a boy, he was sent with our ambassador, Sir
Amyas Paulett, to Paris, found there that " La Pleiade " (the
Seven) had just succeeded in creating the French language
from what had before been as they declared " merely a bar
barous jargon." Young Bacon at once seized the idea and
resolved to create an English language capable of expressing
the highest thoughts. All writers are agreed that at the com
mencement of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, English as a
" literary " language did not exist. All writers are agreed

* Note. — A few copies of my book, "Bacon is Shakespeare," published by
Gay & Hancock, are still on sale at the price of as. 6d. No important
statement contained therein has been or ever will be successfully controverted
because the facts stated are derived from books contained in my unique library,
which includes works that must have belonged to a distinguished Rosicrucian
who was well acquainted with the secrets of Bacon's authorship.

28

that what is known as the Elizabethan Age was the most
glorious period of English literature. All writers are agreed
that our language of to-day is founded upon the English trans
lation of the Bible and upon the Plays of Shakespeare.
Every word of each of these was undoubtedly written by, or
under the direction of, Francis Bacon.

Max Miiller, in his "Science of Language," Vol. L, 1899,
page 378, says : " A well educated person in England who
has been at a public school and at the university . . . seldom
uses more than about 3,000 or 4,000 words. . . . The Hebrew
Testament says all that it has to say with 5,642 words, Milton's
poetry is built up with 8,000, and Shakespeare, who probably
displayed a greater variety of expression than any writer in
any language produced all his plays with about 1 5,000 words."

Does anyone suppose that any master of the Stratford
Grammar School, where Latin was the only language used,
knew so many as 2,000 English words, or that the illiterate
householder of Stratford, known as William Shakespeare,
knew half or a quarter so many?

But to return to the Bible— we mean the Bible of 1611,
known as the Authorised Version, which J. A. Weisse tells us
contains about 15,000 different words (i.e., the same number
as used in the Shakespeare plays). It was trans
lated by 48 men, whose names are known, and then
handed to King James L* It was printed about one and a
half years later. In the Preface, which is evidently written
by Bacon, we are told " we have not tyed ourselves to an
uniformitie of phrasing, or to an identitie of words."
This question of variety of expression is discussed in the
Preface at considerable length (compare with Max Miiller's re
ferences to Shakespeare's extraordinary variety of expression)
and then we read : " Wee might also be charged . . . with some
unequall dealing towards a great number of good English
words ... if we should say, as it were, unto certaine words,
Stand up higher, have a place in the Bible alwaies, and to
others of like qualitie, Get ye hence, be banished for ever."
This means that an endeavour was made to insert all good
English words into this new translation of the Bible, so that
none might be deemed to be merely " secular."

Is it possible that any intelligent person can
really read the Bible as a whole, not now a bit
and now a scrap, but read it straight through like
an ordinary book and fail to perceive that the majestic

* Note.— The forty-eight translators made use of " The Bishops' Bible," but
no copv of this work, on which appear any annotations by the translators, can be
discovered. See Bishop Westcott's "History of the English Bible," 1905, p. 118.

29

rhythm that runs through the whole cannot be the language
of many writers, but must flow from the pen, or at least
from the editorship, of one great master mind ?

A confirmation of this statement that the Authorised
Version of King James I. was edited by one masterhand
is contained in the "Times" newspaper of March 22nd, 1912,
where Archdeacon Westcott, writing about the Revised Version
of 1 88 1, says, the revisers "were men of notable learning and
singular industry. . . . There were far too many of them; and
successful literary results cannot be achieved by syndicates."

Yes, the Bible and Shakespeare embody the language of
the great master, but before it could be so embodied, the
English tongue had to be created, and it was for this great
purpose that Bacon made his piteous appeals for funds to
Bodley, to Burleigh, and to Queen Elizabeth.

Observe the great mass of splendid translations of
the Classics (often second-hand from the French, as
Plutarch's " Lives " by North) with which England was
positively flooded at that period. Hitherto no writer seems
to have called attention to the fact that certain of these
translations were made from the French instead of from
the original Greek or Latin, not because it was easier to take
them from the French, but because in that way the new French
words and phrases were enabled to be introduced to enrich
the English tongue. The sale of these translations could not
possibly have paid any considerable portion of their cost.

Thus Bacon worked. Thus his books under all sorts' of
pseudonyms appeared. No book of the Elizabethan Age of
any value proceeded from any source except from his workshop
of those " good pens," over whom Ben Jonson was foreman.

In a very rare and curious little volume, published anony
mously in 1645, under the title of " The Great Assises holden
in Parnassus by Apollo and his Assessours," Ben
Jonson is described as the " Keeper of the Trophonian Denne,"
and in Westminster Abbey his medallion bust appears clothed
in a left-handed coat to show us that he was a servant of
Bacon.

O, rare Ben Jonson — what a turncoat grown !

Thou ne'er wast such, till clad in stone ;
Then let not this disturb thy sprite,

Another age shall set thy buttons right.

Stowe ii., p. 512-13.

In this same book, we see on the leaf following the title
page the name of Apollo in large letters in an ornamental
frame, and below it in the place of honour we find Francis
Bacon placed as " Lord VERULAN Chancellor of Parnassus?

30

This means that Bacon was the greatest of poets since
the world began. This proud position is also claimed for him
by Thomas Randolf in a Latin poem published in 1640, but
believed to have been written immediately after Bacon's
death in 1626. Thomas Randolf declares that Phoebus (i.e.,
Apollo) was accessory to Bacon's death because he was afraid
that Bacon would some day come to be crowned king of
poetry or the Muses. George Herbert, Bacon's friend, who
had overlooked many of his works, repeats the same story,
calling Bacon the colleague of Sol, i.e., Phoebus Apollo.

Instances might be multiplied, but I will only quote the
words of John Davies, of Hereford, another friend of Bacon's,
who addresses him in his " Scourge of Folly," published about
1610, as follows: —

As to her Bellamoiir the Muse is wont ;
For, thou dost her embozom ; and dost use,
Her company for sport twixt grave affaires.

Bacon was always recognised by his contemporaries as
among the greatest of poets. Although nothing of any poetical
importance bearing Bacon's name had been up to that
time published, Stowe (in his Annales, printed in 1615)
places Bacon seventh in his list of Elizabethan poets.

The Shakespeare Myth is dead.

IN 1898 the Shakespeare myth was mortally wounded by the
curious collection of "may have beens," "might have beens,"
" could have beens," " should have beens," " must have
beens," etc., collected in Sir Sidney Lee's supposititious life of
William Shakespeare. In 1910 it was killed by the Cambridge
History of English Literature, edited by Dr. Ward, Master
of Peterhouse, and Mr. Waller, also of Peterhouse, for in
Volume V., pages 165-6-7, we read: "We are not quite sure
of the identity of Shakespeare's father; we are by no means
certain of the identity of his wife. . . . We do not know
whether he ever went to school. . . . No biography of
Shakespeare, therefore, which deserves any confidence has
ever been constructed without a large infusion of the tell-tale
words ' apparently,' ' probably,' ' there can be little doubt/
and no small infusion of the still more tell-tale ' perhaps,'
' it would be natural,' ' according to what was usual at the
time,' and so forth. . . . John Shakespeare married Mary
Arden, an heiress of a good yeomanry family, but as to whose
connection with a more distinguished one of the same name
there remains much room for doubt."

I should add that no letter addressed to Shakespeare
exists excepting one asking for a loan of £30; and that no
contemporary letter referring to him has been discovered
excepting three which are about money.

In 1910 appeared my own book, " Bacon is Shakespeare,"
which, placed in every library in the world, has carried every
where the news of the decease of the myth.

In 1911 Mark Twain's book, "Is Shakespeare dead?"
which had been published in 1909 in England, was included
in the Tauchnitz collection, and therefore likewise carries the
news of the decease of the myth all over the earth. Mark
Twain describes Shakespeare as just a " Tar Baby," and says :
" About him you can find out nothing. Nothing of
any importance. Nothing worth the trouble of stowing
away in your memory. Nothing that even remotely
indicates that he was ever • anything more than a
distinctly commonplace person ... a small trader in a
small village that did not regard him as a person of any
consequence, and had forgotten all about him before he was
cold in his grave.* . . . We can go to the records and find
out the life-history of every renowned racehorse of modern
times— but not Shakespeare's ! There are many reasons why,
and they have been furnished in cartloads (of guess and con
jecture) . . . but there is one that is worth all the rest of
the reasons put together, and is abundantly sufficient all by
itself— he hadn't any history to tell. There is no way 'of
getting round that deadly fact. And no sane way has yet
been discovered of getting round its formidable significance."

The Shakespeare myth is now destroyed. Does any
educated person of intelligence still believe in the " Tar Baby,"
the illiterate clown of Stratford, who was totally unable to
write a single letter of his own name, and of whom we are
told, if we understand what we are told, that he could not
read a line of print. No book was found in his house, and
neither of his daughters could either read or write.

There exists no " portrait "of Shakespeare. The significant
fact that the Figure put for Shakespeare in the 1623 Folio of
the plays consists of a doubly left-handed dummy is alone
sufficient to dispose of the Shakespeare myth. I have printed
in various newspapers all over the world about a million
copies of articles demonstrating this fact, which none can
successfully dispute

* Note.— Stratford owes all its glory to two of its sons, John, Archbishop of
Canterbury, who built a church there ; and Hugh Clopton, who built, at his own
cost, a bridge of fourteen arches across the Avon. Translated from Jean Blaeu, 1645.

32

In modern times Percy Bysshe Shelley — one of England's
greatest poets (who knew nothing about the Shakespeare con
troversy) — wrote as follows : " Bacon was a poet. His language
has a sweet and majestic rhythm, which satisfies the sense, no
less than the almost superhuman wisdom of his philosophy
satisfies the intellect. It is a strain, which distends and then
bursts the circumference of the reader's mind, and pours itself
forth together with it into the universal element with which it
has perpetual sympathy." This statement by Shelley, taken
in conjunction with the testimony of " The Great Assises
holden in Parnassus," 1645, and the words of Thomas Randolf,
1640, and of Bacon's friends George Herbert and John
Davies, together with the contemporary evidence of Stowe in
1615, are sufficient to dispose, once and for all, of the absurd
contention that is sometimes put forth that Bacon did not
possess sufficient poetical ability to have written his own
greatest work, the Immortal Plays.

Lord Palmerston said that he rejoiced to see the re-
integration of Italy, the unveiling of the mystery of China,
and the explosion of the Shakespeare illusions. Lord
Houghton, the father of the present Marquis of Crewe, said
that he agreed with Lord Palmerston. John Bright said
any man that believed that William Shakespeare wrote
" Hamlet," or " Lear," was a fool. Prince Bismarck said in
1892: "He could not understand how it were possible that a
man, however gifted with the intuitions of genius, could have
written what was attributed to Shakespeare unless he had
been in touch with the great affairs of State, behind the. scenes
of political life, and also intimate with all the social
courtesies and refinements of thought which in Shakespeare's
time were only to be met with in the highest circles "

The " Tempest " is over, the false crown of the Island
(the Stage) has been torn from the head of the dummy that
appeared to wear it. It seems difficult to imagine that
people possessed of ordinary intelligence can any longer
continue to believe that the most learned of all the literary
works in the world was written by the most unlearned of
men, William Shakespeare of Stratford, who never seems even
to have attempted to write a single letter of his own name.
It has been proved that the six so-called signatures of
Shakespeare were written by various law clerks, and it is
now admitted that there exist no other writings which can even
be supposed to be from his pen.

E. D-L.

Printed by Truslove & Bray, Ltd., West Norwood, S.E

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

PR
29^6
D8
1912

Durning-Lawrence, (Sir)
Edwin

The Shakespeare myth